Missing System.Web.Http using in generated file #86

Activity

1. YetAnotherPhil commented on Jun 26, 2016

   

   YetAnotherPhil

   on Jun 26, 2016

   More actions

   This is still an issue with the latest version (1.3.6021.11899).
   Please can you add using System.Web.Http; to avoid error:

   CS0246 The type or namespace name 'IHttpActionResult' could not be found (are you missing a using directive or an assembly reference?)

   Here is an example method: IHttpActionResult Delete(int MyID); that generates the error.

   TY
2. faniereynders commented on Jun 26, 2016

   

   faniereynders

   on Jun 26, 2016

   Last edited by faniereynders

   Member

   More actions

   Adding a reference to System.Web.Http will solve the problem but leaving it with another reference to another assembly that it really doesn't need on the client side. We don't want to do this.

   The return type IHttpActionResult is an abstraction of a HttpResponseMessage and therefore needs to be generated as HttpResponseMessage instead of an interface, (given that ResponseType isn't explicitly specified on the method of the controller).

   I've noticed that this does indeed gets generated like mentioned above, but only some of the methods and will push out a bug fix that addresses this shortly.

   In the meanwhile I would suggest explicitly specifying the return type using ResponseType when using IHttpActionResult responses.
3. YetAnotherPhil commented on Jun 26, 2016

   

   YetAnotherPhil

   on Jun 26, 2016

   Last edited by faniereynders

   More actions

   Fair comment, thx for the speedy reply. Cheers
4. faniereynders commented on Jun 26, 2016

   

   faniereynders

   on Jun 26, 2016

   Member

   More actions

   After further investigation on this issue (and hoping it was changed by an accidental merge earlier on), I found that this specific scenario is implemented by design to enforce the use of ResponseType on actions.

   It generates 3 methods, 2 of which returns a standard HttpResponseMessage by default:

   1. A special async message e.g. Task<HttpResponseMessage> FooAsyncMsg()
   2. A normal async e.g. Task<HttpResponseMessage> FooAsync()
   3. A concrete e.g. Bar Foo()

   Really don't know what the actual difference (or use) is between nr. 1 & 2, therefor I suggest the following:

   1. A special async (as message) e.g. Task<HttpResponseMessage> FooAsyncMessage()
   2. A async e.g. Task<Bar> FooAsync()
   3. A concrete e.g. Bar Foo()
5. faniereynders commented on Jun 26, 2016

   

   faniereynders

   on Jun 26, 2016

   Member

   More actions

   The only thing is that it still shouldn't break if one doesn't use ResponseType. It should fall back to HttpResponseMessage IMHO